[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: One library or many?
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: One library or many?
- From: "Andrew Ahachinsky" <andrew.ahachinsky@melomag.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 20:41:33 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Agreed with Joe's point as well, however I believe that to answer "much this would save the average-size university" is quite a broad question. In order to get detailed documented figures it would require a carefully crafted marketing analysis. When we first worked with http://www.melomag.com/ we had to hire professionals who have estimated A percentage volume of proposed segment market and then they turned the percentages into the numbers. Allow my apologies if my answer sounds a bit rough but I try to avoid Assuming the numbers without knowing all figures involved. Best, Andrew -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of D Anderson Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 7:24 PM To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: RE: One library or many? Joe makes a good point. Centralized data repositories, with comprehensive backup and archive capabilities, will likely replace library storage of periodicals, thereby removing substantial layers of redundancy and associated costs. Electronic delivery eliminates the need for library-based archival and retrieval functions. Open access will make the library's traditional acquisition and gatekeeper functions unnecessary. What's left are reference functions, which could be provided by virtual networks of volunteer specialists. Does anyone have any estimates of how much this would save the average-size university? Dean H. Anderson -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Joseph J. Esposito Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 2:19 PM To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Subject: One library or many? >To me, it seems obvious that the day when the world's scholarly, >peer-reviewed literature can easily be stored by each and every library >in the world -- a wise move to ensure its ready access and preservation - >is within reach, if indeed it is not here already. JE: Why "stored by each and every library"? If it's on the Internet, you only need one library. That's a huge savings for cash-strapped universities. Joe Esposito
- Prev by Date: Re: One library or many?
- Next by Date: Re: One library or many?
- Previous by thread: Re: One library or many?
- Next by thread: Re: One library or many?
- Index(es):